The Catholic Sex Abuse Scandal (U.S)

[Murphy]

Sex abuse cases peaked in the 1980s, with a build up in the 60s and 70s from the negligible numbers in the 50s and before. After the 80s, the numbers again went back down to what they were before the 60s, 70s.

Why did it happen? How could it have been avoided? What should the Church have done, keeping in mind that before John Paul II changed Canon Law so cases were to be delt with by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, each diocese dealt with their cases individually?

Do you argue that celibacy was to blame for the sex abuse scandal? And do you think that the media has been biased in their coverage of the sex abuse scandal?

Discuss.

(Keep in mind, this is only for discussion of the American Catholic sex abuse scandal.)

[anonymaus]

I don't see how celibacy is necessarily related to it. Any career wherein one has access to virtually unlimited numbers of children is likely to draw an exceptional number of pedophiles; also, it should be stated that there is a community of pedophiles who are celibate for fear they will act out their fantasies.

What's happening with the church is no different than what has happened in schools and in junior sports for ages: the real difference to my mind is the Church is almost completely opaque. There seems to be little interest in reform or transparency within the Church at any significant level.

This gives cover to the sorts of people who would choose such a profession for reasons related to their sexual predilections.

[Murphy]

Any career wherein one has access to virtually unlimited numbers of children is likely to draw an exceptional number of pedophiles;

I agree with you, though I would just like to make something clear here. Sex abuse cases in the Church that relate(d) to paedophilia are very rare. The overwhelming majority of cases are ephebophilic in nature. Particularly homosexual men who have sexual relations with asolescent boys. It's important to mark this difference because to deal with a problem one must know what the problem is.

I have heard conflicting age-ranges concerning victims, though the most common seem to be boys aged 15-17 or 12-16.


the real difference to my mind is the Church is almost completely opaque. There seems to be little interest in reform or transparency within the Church at any significant level.

I disagree with you here. As I said in my first post, reported abuse cases peaked in the 1980s and in the 90s and early 00s, Canon Law was changed so that abuse cases would be dealt directly by the Vatican and not on an individual diocesan level. Since the 90s, reported abuse has dropped drastically, back to the levels of pre-60s.

The necessary reforms in Canon Law were met, most reports that the media are putting forward, are reported cases from 30-40 years ago. The recent case of Father Murphy in.. Wisconsin I think, being a fine example of media bias. The Archdiocese failed to take Father Murphy in hand, and by the time that he was reported to the Vatican, it was 1991! 20-odd years after the abuse. Yet the media lay the blame at Pope Benedict's feet because the priest was not defrocked. This was before the changes in Canon Law where the trial would have taken too long. Civil charges had already been dropped against Father Murphy, he was in poor health. So instead they removed him from a position where he could ever harm boys again. He died two years later. But Pope Benedict was apparently involved in a cover-up? No!

I think to an extent there was a culture of secrecy at the time. Though the Church in no way has a monopoly on this. I can see arguing for more transparency in regards to records from that time etc. but that is about it.


This gives cover to the sorts of people who would choose such a profession for reasons related to their sexual predilections.

Indeed. This is what I hate most about these people. The sacred priesthood was instituted by Christ, people should be able to trust the clergy. At that time, they did! Unconditional trust, and these bastards broke it!

[Jamt]

The celibacy rule of the Catholic Church from the 10 centenary were always opposed and not followed in Catholic Sweden and the reformation took care of the rest. Most of the abuse, but not all, in the Catholic world is gay priests and sense the no marriage rule is on shaky grounds I suggest you Papists scrap those rules and thereby receive a better class of priests. Not that most celibate priests are pedophiles, but it makes people wonder.

[Murphy]

The celibacy rule of the Catholic Church from the 10 centenary were always opposed and not followed in Catholic Sweden and the reformation took care of the rest.

What evidence have you that celibacy was never practiced by the Catholic clergy in Sweden?


Most of the abuse, but not all, in the Catholic world is gay priests

Very true.


and sense the no marriage rule is on shaky grounds I suggest you Papists scrap those rules and thereby receive a better class of priests.

So.. celibate men cannot be good priests? Being married automatically makes someone a better man?


Not that most celibate priests are pedophiles

Never mind that, very few of the men involved in the abuse cases are even paedophiles.


but it makes people wonder.

I think that says much more about the state of modern society than it does the character of a priest.

[anonymaus]

Sex abuse cases in the Church that relate(d) to paedophilia are very rare. The overwhelming majority of cases are ephebophilic in nature.

Indeed, I should have stated that to begin with; that's a point I bring up with other people as well. And one of the recent cases is actually, as I understand it, an involvement with adult male prostitution and not with innocents under their care.


Canon Law was changed so that abuse cases would be dealt directly by the Vatican and not on an individual diocesan level. Since the 90s, reported abuse has dropped drastically, back to the levels of pre-60s.

To the first sentence, I had never heard that. I have, as recently as yesterday, read articles and op-eds suggesting the Pope cannot be made to testify or really even be involved because these matters are the responsibility of the diocese.

To the second sentence, my inner cynic sees an amusing correlation between top-down control of the issue and a reduction in reported abuse. Perhaps not an entirely fictitious correlation although certainly not evidenced.


I think to an extent there was a culture of secrecy at the time. Though the Church in no way has a monopoly on this. I can see arguing for more transparency in regards to records from that time etc. but that is about it.

I would agree that the culture of secrecy is largely gone, now, at least functionally if not intentionally. I'm sure past victims would want such records opened for their own reasons, but I think there's a much more important role for transparency to play in the Church's continuation as a trusted organization; my view of the Church until my teen years was one of a fair amount of reverence. That has since changed: I think the trust can be rebuilt, even to non-Catholics and non-believers, if the issues are tackled fearlessly.


people should be able to trust the clergy.

And that is exactly why I say the above.

[Murphy]

Indeed, I should have stated that to begin with; that's a point I bring up with other people as well.

:)!


And one of the recent cases is actually, as I understand it, an involvement with adult male prostitution and not with innocents under their care.

Damn, which one is this? I think I must have missed hearing about this one.


To the first sentence, I had never heard that. I have, as recently as yesterday, read articles and op-eds suggesting the Pope cannot be made to testify or really even be involved because these matters are the responsibility of the diocese.

Well, the Pope cannot go to trial because of the simple fact that he's a Head of State. You can't bring Queen Elizabeth to trail in a New York courtroom either!

As to the second part of the quote, yes. It's up to the diocese to an extent. Getting to the bottom of the story, reporting to civil authorities etc. What I was referring to however is what comes after that. The internal Church inquiries and trials are done by the formerly named Inquisition, to defrock the priest etc.


To the second sentence, my inner cynic sees an amusing correlation between top-down control of the issue and a reduction in reported abuse. Perhaps not an entirely fictitious correlation although certainly not evidenced.

Haha. Well, we all have that little conspiracist voice in our heads :P.


I would agree that the culture of secrecy is largely gone, now, at least functionally if not intentionally. I'm sure past victims would want such records opened for their own reasons, but I think there's a much more important role for transparency to play in its continuation as a trusted organization; my view of the Church until my teen years was one of a fair amount of reverence. That has since changed: I think the trust can be rebuilt, even to non-Catholics and non-believers, if the issues are tackled fearlessly.

And that is exactly why I say the above.

Completely agree with what you said. However I will note that opening records, though perhaps for the best, it may not be wise to open them directly to the public. The privacy for the victims is also very important.

[Jamt]

A good article on Front Porch Republic on this subject. Catholic priests are apparently less likely to abuse children than Protestant priests and less likely than the average man. http://www.frontporchrepublic.com/2010/04/the-culture-of-atomic-eros-and-the-hatred-of-the-church/

[Austin]

Well their just people with the same lusts and flaws as anyone so it didn't really surprise me when I heard of it. It happens in other faiths congregations as well have no delusions.

The irony is the West's transparency and openness has allowed things like this to come out, which is certainly a good thing, however it allows less advanced cultures and societies to point an accusing finger when very likely if not surely their faith has this same issue behind closed doors.

Whenever you put someone on a spiritual pedestal and then give them flocks of children to supervise it is only a matter of when will abuses happen not if they will.

[Lenny]

Catholic priests are apparently less likely to abuse children than the average man.

That does not make logical sense--

Fact A.
We know that priests of the Roman Church are very often homosexual (10% to 50% are the estimates). This is because of the celibacy rule and the ban on marriage (a rule cooked-up by some typical crooked medieval Pope in a power-grab) -- it attracts homosexuals. Roman priesthood is a place suited for them as they are not interested in normal marriage, which would otherwise be socially-stigmatized.

Fact B.
AFAIK, we know that homosexuals are more likely to molest children than "the average man".

[Murphy]

We know that priests of the Roman Church are very often homosexual (10% to 50% are the estimates).

I wonder if you have any evidence to back up your outlandish claims? Ha! Asking a Protestant for evidence. What am I thinking? Scum like you run from the truth like fire.


This is because of the celibacy rule and the ban on marriage (a rule cooked-up by some typical crooked medieval Pope in a power-grab) -- it attracts homosexuals.

You'll need to prove it. One would ask why celibacy would attract homosexuals? I am curious, as a Protestant, have you ever actually opened your bible? A certain someone talks at length about celibacy. Are you saying he was a homosexual?

As for the ban on marriage, again you'll need to offer evidence that such promotes homosexuality. Until them, heretic, keep your mouth shut.


Roman priesthood is a place suited for them as they are not interested in normal marriage, which would otherwise be socially-stigmatized.

You've never ven met a Catholic Priest. If you did you would realise that these men for the most part do struggle with a desire to marry. They are men after all. But they also do not give into their baser nature so they remain celibate to serve God.

You're a shinning example of everything that is wrong with Protestantism. Protestantism in the end is about making the individual happy. You want sex but no children? CONDOMS! You liked your old wife, but there's an even hotter lass who has come along? DIVORCE! Something in the Bible not quite to your liking? FUCK IT! REMOVE IT!

You are exactly what is wrong with our society today as well. It's all about "me, me, me, me, fucking me!". It's not about God. That's why life will be a lot sweeter the day God grants me the chance to either run bastards like you through or hang you from the lamp posts. You don't deserve the breath of life.


AFAIK, we know that homosexuals are more likely to molest children than "the average man".

Evidence?

Seriously Lenny, just fuck off. Your own irrational fear and hatred of the Church is just depressing.

[Austin]

Aequoreus I was on the phone and on skype with this blonde, dropped out of college to model, Italian girl from Austin. She talked to me for two hours then abruptly decided that she had to go and hangs up. Completely ignored me after that! Anyways though as depressing and life altering as that was..lol.....she had told me that she stopped dating the last guy she was with because she decided when out on a date with him that his voice was to high, and stopped seeing him after that.....

She also told me she left her ex of 7 months because he wanted to become a fireman and she flat out told him that wont be enough money for me and left him. That is the reality people are superficial these days it isn't just a matter of religion.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Why did it happen? How could it have been avoided? What should the Church have done, keeping in mind that before John Paul II changed Canon Law so cases were to be delt with by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, each diocese dealt with their cases individually?

Do you argue that celibacy was to blame for the sex abuse scandal? And do you think that the media has been biased in their coverage of the sex abuse scandal?


The unbiblical requirement of celibacy on priests in the Roman Catholic Church likely contributes to sexual abuse in the following ways: (1) Men whom God did not intend/design to be celibate are forced to be celibate, resulting in sexual tension and stress. (2) With the very difficult requirement of celibacy, the Catholic priesthood attracts a higher percentage of men with abnormal sexual tendencies. Whether (1) or (2) is more prominent, the unbiblical requirement of celibacy is the cause. In the case of (1), men whom God did not design to be celibate are forced to be celibate, resulting in these men seeking sexual release in "alternative" ways. In the case of (2), men without natural sexual desires are more willing to make the sacrifice of celibacy, which, when they give in to sexual temptations, results in unnatural sexual acts, whether it be homosexuality or pedophilia.

It is completely unbiblical for any church to require celibacy among its leaders. In the qualifications from church leadership sections (1 Timothy 3:1-13 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/niv/1%20Timothy%203.1-13); Titus 1:6-9 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/niv/Titus%201.6-9)), the Apostle Paul assumes that bishops, elders, overseers, and deacons will be married and have children. While these qualifications should not be viewed as requiring marriage/family to serve in church leadership, they are most definitely an allowance for married men to serve as leaders in the church. It is therefore completely anti-biblical for any church to require celibacy of its leaders.

With the priesthood of all believers (http://www.gotquestions.org/priesthood-believers.html) and Jesus' fulfillment/completion of the Old Testament sacrificial system and priesthood, I do not believe the New Testament instructs that there should even be priests. Biblically speaking, a priest is a mediator (primarily through sacrifices) between God and man. With the Jesus as our High Priest (http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-High-Priest.html), we already have direct access to God (Hebrews 4:14-16 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/niv/Hebrews%204.14-16)) and have no need for any other mediator (1 Timothy 2:5 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/niv/1%20Timothy%202.5)).


Whatever the number is, it is surely an exceedingly small percentage. The vast majorities of Catholic priests have never, and would never, molest or harm a child in any way.

Prevention is better than cure
At this late stage pedophile priests should be arrested and punished just as any other pedophile would be. Anyone covering up or, by negligence, enabling pedophilia in the church should be prosecuted. A priest who has sexually abused a child, or an adult for that matter, should never be allowed back into church leadership, as he could most definitely not be considered "above reproach" (1 Timothy 3:2 (http://bible.logos.com/passage/niv/1%20Timothy%203.2)). The pedophile priest scandal in the Roman Catholic Church is absolutely horrid. There is nothing more antithetical to the message of Christ than priests sexually abusing children. May God use this scandal to awaken the church of Jesus Christ to the presence of apostates within the church and to strongly motivate the church to be fully biblical in all of its beliefs and practices.The media used the scandal to boost their circulation.They are vultures waiting for a carcass.

The thousands of claimants are to be scrutinized for their stories.

Have you ever looked at the living conditions/quarters of priests and their 'salaries'.????
Have you ever been on a pulpit and looked at the dumb faces of the fateful.??
Have you ever,like Jesus, had the urge to throw out half of the fateful at the portal/entrance of the church displaying/selling stupid Rosaries with a cross dangling from it,or 1 meter Rosary made from wood or Holy water or
photos/statues of Mary,Jesus ,child or Bibles or other sin eating shit.
A priest does not become a pedophile from the start.Society and The church make a pedophile.
Does the world really think a priest is that stupid not to see the dangers of child abuse and the consequences.
He may go to confessions and confession is sacred in the Church,but to a priest it is a cop out.
It is like telling :"Father, I have stolen a piece of rope and ask for forgiveness." Forgetting to say attached to the rope was a cow.

I was a fokking novice for 7 months,I know what priests think...think and how they hate at times to be a good shepherd to a bunch of assholes in front of you.

Also, do not think for one moment that allowing priests to marry will do away with child abuse. See Protestantism

[Murphy]

and The church make a pedophile.

Sorry Kleit, but this one sentence of yours is enough to dismiss you from the thread.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Sorry Kleit, but this one sentence of yours is enough to dismiss you from the thread.

No problem.

[Lenny]

Scum like you run from the truth like fire.

heretic, keep your mouth shut.

life will be a lot sweeter the day God grants me the chance to either run bastards like you through or hang you from the lamp posts. You don't deserve the breath of life.

Seriously Lenny, just fuck off. Your own irrational fear and hatred of the Church is just depressing.
:rolleyes2:



Compare this delightful display to the following excerpt from the "Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction" used through the 1800s for certain high-ranking members of the cloak-and-dagger wing of Loyola's "Society of Jesus":

I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am directed to do, to extirpate them from the face of the whole Earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex nor condition, and that I will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and crush their infants' heads against the walls in order to annihilate their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honour, rank, dignity or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus.

[poiuytrewq0987]

That does not make logical sense--

Fact A.
We know that priests of the Roman Church are very often homosexual (10% to 50% are the estimates). This is because of the celibacy rule and the ban on marriage (a rule cooked-up by some typical crooked medieval Pope in a power-grab) -- it attracts homosexuals. Roman priesthood is a place suited for them as they are not interested in normal marriage, which would otherwise be socially-stigmatized.

Fact B.
AFAIK, we know that homosexuals are more likely to molest children than "the average man".

This is why Orthodox Christianity is the future. Latin Catholicism will die a slow death with pedophilia, homosexuality, etc common among the priesthood.

[Lenny]

This is why Orthodox Christianity is the future. Latin Catholicism will die a slow death with pedophilia, homosexuality, etc common among the priesthood.
Orthodox priests can marry, right?

If I recall correctly, that was one of the sticking points in the ongoing schism.


It was also one of the rallying points for the anti-Papal patriots in Europe during the Reformation. Result:
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/2622/image35ye5.gif

[poiuytrewq0987]

Orthodox priests can marry, right?

If I recall correctly, that was one of the sticking points in the ongoing schism.


It was also one of the rallying points for the anti-Papal patriots in Europe during the Reformation. Result:


Yep, you have to be married if you want to become a priest I think (I'm not exactly up to date on religious matters but I have a good idea of what).

[W. R.]

Orthodox priests can marry, right?

If I recall correctly, that was one of the sticking points in the ongoing schism.[/img]Catholic priests can marry too... unless they are Latin rite Catholics. But technically thousands of Catholic (f.e. Greek Catholic/Uniate) priests are legally married.

[Murphy]

:rolleyes2:

Wow.. the fact that you can post that with a straight face.. oh seriously.. gah.. I think my ribs have cracked from laughing at you. Baha.. pathetic.

Did you know when your fellow heretics published that little lie, it wasn't even aimed at the Jesuits ;)?

[Lenny]

Catholic priests can marry too... unless they are Latin rite Catholics. But technically thousands of Catholic (f.e. Greek Catholic/Uniate) priests are legally married.
I'd say the supposed "Eastern-Catholics" are a still much more Orthodox than Catholic.

Anyway, the word 'catholic' is technically meaningless: It just means "universal". All churches would claim to be part of the supra-body of Christianity. Unfortunately, the Bishops of Rome monopolized the use of that word "Catholic" as applying to followers of the Church of Rome only. (Implying that those in other churches are not part of proper Christianity --> Those who don't throw "coins to make the Pope's coffers ring" will not have their souls "to heaven spring":D).

Some Orthodox cautiously tried to renew ties with Rome centuries ago, it seems in a bid to get away from Orthodox political power: They never fully did it, but somehow use the title anyway. [Sort of like Puerto-Rico: Not really in the USA, but given U.S. citizenship, plus they don't pay taxes.]

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Wow.. the fact that you can post that with a straight face.. oh seriously.. gah.. I think my ribs have cracked from laughing at you. Baha.. pathetic.

Did you know when your fellow heretics published that little lie, it wasn't even aimed at the Jesuits ;)?


http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/greygrad.gif

JESUIT Extreme Oath of Induction
as recorded in the Journals of the 62D Congress, 3d Session of the U.S.
(House Calendar No. 397. Report No. 1523)
Congressional Record---House, 15 Feb. 1913, pp3215-3216

I_Kleitrapper, now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, and all the saints, sacred host of Heaven, and to you, my Ghostly Father, the superior general of the Society of Jesus, founded by St. Ignatius Loyoly, in the pontification of Paul the III, and continued to the present, do by the womb of the Virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ, declare and swear that His Holiness, the Pope, is Christ's vice regent and is the true and only head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by the virtue of the keys of binding and loosing given His Holiness by my Saviour, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes, States, Commonwealths, and Governments and they may be safely destroyed. Therefore to the utmost of my power I will defend this doctrine and His Holiness's right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant authority whatever, especially the Lutheran Church of Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, and the now pretended authority and Church's of England and Scotland, and the branches of same now established in Ireland and on the continent of America and elsewhere and all adherents in regard that they may be usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome. I do now denounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or State, named Protestant or Liberal, or obedience to any of their laws, magistrates or officers. I do further declare that the doctrine of the Churches of England and Scotland of the Calvinists, Huguenots, and others of the name of Protestants or Masons to be damnable, and they themselves to be damned who will not forsake the same. I do further declare that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of His Holiness's agents, in any place where I should be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Ireland or America, or in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my utmost to extirpate the heretical Protestant or Masonic doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, legal or otherwise. I do further promise and declare that, notwithstanding I am dispensed with to assume any religion heretical for the propagation of the Mother Church's interest; to keep secret and private all her agents counsels from time to time, as they intrust me, and not divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or circumstances whatever, but to execute all that should be proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me by you, my Ghostly Father, or any of this sacred order. I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ. That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions north, jungles of India, to the centers of civilization of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things whatsoever is communicated to me. I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am directed to do, to extirpate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition, and that will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and crush their infant's heads against the walls in order to annihilate their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus. In confirmation of which I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all corporal powers, and with the dagger which I now receive I will subscribe my name written in my blood in testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken in my determination may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet and my throat from ear to ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth and my soul shall be tortured by demons in eternal hell forever. That I will in voting always vote for a Knight of Columbus in preference to a Protestant, especially a Mason, and that I will leave my party so to do; that if two Catholics are on the ticket I will satisfy myself which is the better supporter of Mother Church and vote accordingly. That I will not deal with or employ a Protestant if in my power to deal with or employ a Catholic. That I will place Catholic girls in Protestant families that a weekly report may be made of the inner movements of the heretics. That I will provide myself with arms and ammunition that I may be in readiness when the word is passed, or I am commanded to defend the church either as an individual or with the militia of the Pope. All of which I,Kleitrapper, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed sacrament which I am now to receive to perform and on part to keep this my oath. In testimony hereof, I take this most holy and blessed sacrament of the Eucharist and witness the same further with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and seal in the face of this holy sacrament.


Where is my buttcrack:D

[Lulletje Rozewater]

(Implying that those who don't throw "coins to make the Pope's coffers ring" will not have their souls "spring" to heaven:D).

Give all your goods away to the poor and follow me. That is what priests did and gave it away to the poor pope.
The Vatican is so unhealthy rich,that it defies common sense.
They could feed all of America for 6 months plus.
I call that filthy rich.

One must differentiate between a priest and the Vatican mob

[Murphy]

Give all your goods away to the poor and follow me. That is what priests did and gave it away to the poor pope.
The Vatican is so unhealthy rich,that it defies common sense.
They could feed all of America for 6 months plus.
I call that filthy rich.

One must differentiate between a priest and the Vatican mob


Whilst the whole time you ignore the fact that world wide, without question, the Vatican gives more charity than any organisation and insititution. Filthy rich..? I don't think so. Holy Mother Church does not abuse the money she is entrusted with.

[Murphy]

[. . .]

This lie was first propagated against the Knights of Columbus, not the Jesuits. It was only applied to the Jesuits later. Fool.

[Lenny]

This [Extreme Oath of Induction] was first propagated against the Knights of Columbus, not the Jesuits. It was only applied to the Jesuits laterl.
According to Dr.Paisley, it was first obtained and leaked by a French printer in the early 1800s (http://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=jesuit), and first appeared in English translation in 1843.

Knights of Columbus, meanwhile, was founded in the USA in the 1880s. :rolleyes:

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Whilst the whole time you ignore the fact that world wide, without question, the Vatican gives more charity than any organisation and insititution. Filthy rich..? I don't think so. Holy Mother Church does not abuse the money she is entrusted with.

Well, well, I give the Pope 1 dollar and he gives 10 cents to the poor.
Check the Vatican's financial statement again.
Did the Lord of Lords not say to follow Him without the burden of possessions.????

Wake up.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

This lie was first propagated against the Knights of Columbus, not the Jesuits. It was only applied to the Jesuits later. Fool.

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/greygrad.gif
JESUIT Extreme Oath of Induction
as recorded in the Journals of the 62D Congress, 3d Session of the U.S.
(House Calendar No. 397. Report No. 1523)
Congressional Record---House, 15 Feb. 1913, pp3215-3216

Does it matter,
Lie or no lie it is there in black and white.
And yes.I am a fool I was a member of the Knights of Da Gama,your Knights of Columbus
http://kdg.co.za/

Masons or KKK I see no difference in the Hierarchy.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Bush_%26_4th_Degree.jpg/220px-Bush_%26_4th_Degree.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bush_%26_4th_Degree.jpg) http://bits.wikimedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bush_%26_4th_Degree.jpg)
George W. Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) greets Fourth Degree Knights at the 122nd Annual Convention.

Jesus certailny did not have such a peacock entourage




ouncil Assembly Circle Grand Knight Navigator Chief Squire Chaplain* Friar* Father Prior Deputy Grand Knight Captain Deputy Chief Squire Chancellor Admiral Deputy Chief Squire Recorder Scribe Notary Financial Secretary** Comptroller Bursar Treasurer Purser Bursar Lecturer* nonexistent nonexistent Advocate nonexistent nonexistent Warden Pilot Marshall Inside Guard Inner Sentinel Sentry Outside Guard Outer Sentinel Sentry Trustee (3 Year) Trustee (3 Year) nonexistent Trustee (2 Year) Trustee (2 Year) nonexistent Trustee (1 Year) Trustee (1 Year) nonexistent nonexistent Color Corp Commander nonexistent


Go home and sleep it off